Twitter is not a utility. We really need to stop treating techbro services like utilities. If we feel they actually are utilities, the government can step in and make that claim and the appropriate changes.
I'm not on tiktok, but I'll admit to using YouTube as a search engine a lot. Also googling something and immediately hitting the video tab before reading any of the results.
If it's a private company that con do what it wants, like blocking political opponents, it should not be under safe harbor protections.
That's the point in yelling about this. If Elon wants a private forum for him and his mates, he should also be fully responsible when his mates posts child porn on his servers.
The EU has declared Twitter and a few others to be gate-keepers and they will now be held to a higher standard. But I don't think the EU is going to use this power to save US democracy.
Imagine trying winning chess when the board itself plays against you. Twitter/X must be dropped immediately, it's a censorship-propaganda machine which is now only works for those who control it.
If only the federal government could implement some sort of server that would allow them to self-host social media for officials and prominent candidates. I wish there were some well-known and tested service that other governments were using and they could just implement in the USA.
This kind of event is precisely what drives things like social media adoption. If Harris and the DNC organized an actual messaging campaign and took advantage of this energy to promote Twitter alternatives, a lot of people would join.
I don't think legally the Federal Government is allowed to do that. Maybe if the service is available to everyone. Now that option would be pretty cool. I'm fine with nationalized federated social media hosts.
That sounds pretty shakey. Federal employees have their own email addresses, but you can't just go ask for a .gov email address, you have to get a job with the government for one. The federal government has plenty of places that only some are allowed to post to. Now, if they were to say, only allow certain people to have accounts with no apperent rhyme or reason that would be grounds for a discrimination lawsuit, but they could simply say "any verified current or former federal elected official, federal department head, or state governor is allowed an account" and expand or shrink the scope as needed. The fediverse honestly makes that so much cleaner than something they host themselves with all of the nuances of what is and isn't federated, the government could simply configure the federation to meet their legal and liability needs while users can stream in from any fediverse instance
Sigh. Not surprised.. given that Musk is a hypocrite on free speech completely. It's getting wild. I use this place now because after years of no issues.. suddenly I'm shadow banned on Reddit. Instead of getting mad I just left. Screw those who would stifle others but pretend to believe the opposite.
What are these fucking people doing on Twitter anyway? Why they hanging out with the Nazis? You're still on Twitter this point I have some healthy suspicions about your character.
People go where they think the people are. X is still the closest thing to Twitter since Elon came along. I deleted my account, but feel like I’m in the minority.
You know I once read this really amazing book called They Thought They Were Free. It was written by a journalist right after World War II who went to Germany and talked to normal Germans just German citizens. About how they allowed Nazis to take over how they lived in a Nazi Society how they were okay with it how they kind of joined in on it. A lot of the things they said being said in this thread. It's all the same fucking logic.
If they choose to support Twitter, they must expect to take the consequences. It's a known cess pit. Being active on a centralised network does harm. You can't grizzle after drawing innocent people in to such a bad place.
They are on Twitter because nothing has displaced Twitter for what it is. That's tricky because people follow the content, so the content generators, the heavy hitters, have to choose en masse to go somewhere else.
I think that's what that Dulles brother said about why he kept doing business with the Nazis even into the 1940s. Even when the rest of the heads of his business said you should stop doing this we don't need to be invested with the Nazis they just invaded Poland he said no money still there I want to hang out with Nazis.
Cuz here's the thing if everyone who wasn't one left that site it wouldn't be a problem anymore, a different site would be used.
I'm on Twitter because all the OSINT people who track the invasion/war in Ukraine basically only use Twitter. I like following OSINT info to get a real perspective on what's going on.
Maybe it would behoove you to remind those people that they're on a website run by someone who has a material and vested interest in the destruction of Ukraine. That they should change to another website.
Not all parts of twitter is chock full of Nazis. The parts I follow probably won't ever move over to Mastodon, so I'm stuck with Twitter. The good thing is that part barely has any Nazis.
Good job on brushing everyone on Twitter with the same broad stroke, though. Really shows how progressive you can be.
Good. They should abandon twitter and all other racist, misogynist, transphobic, xenophobic, homophobic bigoted platforms. I hope they have a bad time there.
Political parties should host their own mastodon instances, and give their members accounts. Companies should do the same. It removes all the problems of imitation because the organisation stands as guarantor that the account is the official one.
I'm not sure on the capabilities of Mastodon. But companies will never go for this if Mastodon doesn't support saml or active directory (or other Auth systems). It needs to integrate with their enterprise tools.
I tend to feel the same but at the same time, the shadowy figures involved there would love it to see the ratio of extremist increase. An exodus of more sane members might play straight into their hands.
That said, I can’t understand why anyone without an official state role is still on that platform.
This reminds me that someone set up a donation link via actblue where donations via that link come with the message that she and her campaign should set up their own mastodon server.
They are up to $40,000 as I type this.
So if you were thinking of donating anyway, you can go through here to point that money to a “cause” you want her to consider. May not happen, but at least we might get it on their radar.
It pisses me off how twitter went to fuck. People cried that we need something not owned by some rich cunt. We told everyone to join mastodon so that wouldn't happen again.
What did people do? Wait for another rich cunt (mark suckerberg) to start a clone and the original creator of twitter to make another one and join that...
...but these people just use it as a way of talking to the media. As long as people of power and influence shift, so will the press, and then so will everyone else.
Home many times do you hear "Trump, on his platform truth.social, said...."? They've gone there because he's gone there.
Makes me curious if you get more attention on mastodon though. Like if I pitched something on Lemmy there's a good chance I get the same number of eye balls compared to Reddit, not counting ads. (Although if Kamala posted about Linux and/or Star Trek that's front page, no ad money needed! Lol)
Nice graphic! But this data seems wildly out of date. For example, LinkedIn has over 1 billion users. Unless this is referring to weekly active users or something, but the row just says “users”.
I'm not down with the perpetual victim-blaming against X/Twitter users here on Lemmy.
Sources like campaigns, news outlets, authors, studios, engineers, actors, comedians, etc. post on there because they basically have to -- if they want to get the word out, that is.
Consumers go there to read from the sources because they basically have to. While each source may have their own separate blog or whatever, X/Twitter is pretty much the only place that unifies those feeds. (I know, I miss the heyday of RSS too.)
Expecting people to just "take the hit" and go dark on their communications so we can build up alternatives to X/Twitter is not an acceptable recommendation.
What we need to do is:
Make it illegal to block third-party clients from interoperating with services
Compel providers of a certain size to expose a first-party API
Make it legal to reverse-engineer APIs so they can't just make the first-party API suck and call it a day
Then we integrate X/Twitter into the fediverse, so you can start using something else and still keep your X/Twitter stuff
Victim blaming is a little extreme way to describe it, but yeah I don't blame politicians for using it, but I absolutely will blame them for exclusively using it and letting their media be controlled by a private entity, especially one that is no longer publicly accessible.
POSSE (publish [on your] own site, syndicate everywhere) is the way to go. Don't assume everyone is just using a platform, especially if you're providing a public or essential service.
re your points, I think the EU's gatekeeper law was pretty good.
Twitter isn't a service. It is a useful platform and should not be ignored, but it is a larger, worldwide version of r/conservative at this point. Go in expecting hostility and "untraceable account bugs that tHeY juST cANt seEm tO ResOLve!".
What we need to do is: Make it illegal to run a business
Twitter doesn't owe anyone anything. Kamala could go post anywhere else but she's not even though the left hates Elon.
The idea that we should pass laws to force twitter to show certain info and expose endpoints to support third party apps is ridiculous. It's their data and they aren't putting a gun to anyone's head.
Passing a law forcing the government to use only FLOSS software for day-to-day activities solves this problem, actually makes sense on a principle level and isn't a ridiculous overreach of power.
Well, I gotta ask then... How do you feel about HP's printer business model? The fact that you can only use it with HP-approved ink, in HP-approved ways. Do you think that's a fair business model which will stand or fall on its own merits, or an abusive one that prevents consumers from using their own stuff the way they want to? Should it be legal?
IG has a default setting to not show you political suggestions from accounts you do not follow. I'm guessing that is the same for Facebook. You can change it in the settings though.
How much can this be abused before it is overdue to treat X as a common carrier?
Edit: why is this being downvoted? given how critical X is it should be regulated by the government(s). Yes we all moved to the fediverse but we are a minority, millions still rely on X for better or worse.
I'm childish and downvote anyone who refers to twitter as "x". It's like you're on your knees licking Elons bum, right after he told you to call it x, you did what you were told lol.
Also I never got on the twitter bandwagon as it just didn't appeal to me. My social media addiction was reddit.
Twitter sucks. X is a letter. Or a variable in algebra.